So like, the complete opposite of what we need?
So like, the complete opposite of what we need?
Cant imagine making 30 k a year and having to pay even 1600 in taxes. This is saying it will increase that much.
237 comments
-
It’s because it IS wrong. Animals resort to violence when they don’t get their way.
-
Don't kid yourself, you're pro-violence if you're okay with how the system is now.
-
Where in what I said did you interpret that I was okay with how the system is?
-
You just claimed all violence is wrong, in reply to why people are choosing "nonviolence" which is a liberal propagandized view because the entire system is predicated on very active violence, just not in front of the consumers.
Also odd to call all animals wrong for "choosing" violence, I'm not certain how you define it, but colloquially violence is either inherently part of how nature works or a choice that is within some human defined morality that cannot be blanket applied to other animals.
-
“LiBruL pROpAgAnDa!”
For fucks sake. It’s not propaganda to think violence isn’t the answer to political problems. Have you never heard the saying “two wrongs don’t make a right?” If not, learn it, if so, them tire being willfully obtuse.
And you know damn well I didn’t mean “animals” to imply actual animals. It’s a term. How about you replace “animals” with “losers,” or “assholes” instead.
Lastly, I tend to avoid arguing with smug and arrogant people that try and rub pseudo-intellectual bullshit all over everything. So…
Have a day.
-
It's propaganda to think that violence isnt a last resort. I hope you never in a position to need self-defense because you seem to not believe in it.
Why would I assume otherwise? I would never call another group of people "animals," that's dehumanizing. Why would I assume someone who is nonviolence is okay with equating other people to animals, is kindness and respect not a core belief of nonviolence?
Quick to call others smug and arrogant because you can't have a dialogue.
I hope you break out of your cognitive dissonance chamber one day.
-
If one thinks violence is the only way to solve your problems. They are no more than an animal. This is my belief. I won’t apologize because you disagree. Evolution has allowed us to solve our problems without the need to kill people.
Oh and…
This isn’t cognitive dissonance. I know it’s a nice sounding big word that makes you sound smart, but it doesn’t apply here. My actions and my belief are perfectly aligned, so… Maybe learn what it means before you toss that one around, mmmkay?
-
Did you miss the last resort part of my comment? No one is saying it's the only way, you're saying it's not a way whatsoever and I'm saying it's a way and one that should be avoided.
People are already being exposed to violence in the system. It's already happening. Why are you for that?
-
I’m saying it’s not even a last resort. Because there are many ways to fix problems without violence.
And please don’t edit my statement to mean anything other than what I said. I’m not ”for” anything here. I’ve said nothing that even remotely lends to it. So maybe your reading comprehension issue stems from the idea that you try and make things equate to what you want them to instead of what reality shows they do.
-
Then give me a few we haven't tried because I've been searching
-
So… in my opinion, and my opinion only- what do I suggest we do In this specific situation where America is seemingly fucked with no way out?
I suggest we just accept it, and hope that in four years the ninety million some-odd fucking assholes that didn’t want to listen to anyone in November decide to get off their smug and entitled asses and participate this time- because this could have easily been avoided.
We had plenty of warning. We all saw this coming from miles away. We were TOLD what was going to happen. And there were no excuses.
So yeah. I’d say that we all reap what has been sewn by the smug and entitled that chose to not take the warnings seriously. I’d say the we collectively sleep in the bed they made for us. And while we all suffer together- I’d say they should not avert their eyes or turn their head when the oppressive weight of this authoritarian dictatorship begins to press down HARD on them, their loved ones, and their fellow citizens. Because they definitely share in the blame for it happening-
Nothing is happening now that they didn’t knowingly allow to happen. So we have naught to do but watch as any good that remains in America begins to rot away- with, and because of the bad like a barrel of abandoned apples.
And as for a violent response?
Yeah. I don’t understand how this isn’t more fundamentally understood, but let’s cover it anyway:
It’s not 1775 anymore. Things have changed.
ANY violent response to Краснов and his administration can and probably will- only result in a colossal retaliatory response that will cost FAR too many innocent lives to be lost and all but guarantee a temporary to permanent military takeover and occupation of every state in the nation.
I sincerely hope that anyone thinking to organize a violent response to Краснов look up what martial law means, and make their peace with the fact that this is what they’re going to bring down on every citizen in this country.
Because that’s where we are headed.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
The allied soldiers who killed the nazi soldiers are... doing something wrong?
🤔
-
Nice whatabout. Not entertaining it.
-
That's not what a whatabout is.
-
“Animals resort to violence”
“Whatabout allies soldiers?”
Yes it is.
-
Here, I know it's confusing if you haven't read about what the "whatabout" logical fallacy means, so I'll post it for you here.
"the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation or raising a different issue."
Unfortunately, you are objectively wrong about this. Feel free to try and change the meaning, if you want, but currently that is not what a "whatabout" is. In this case, calling it a "whatabout" is being used to deflect from facts that you cannot reckon with because they challenge your beliefs.
I hope you're able to take this information in and accept it. Good luck. Pacifism is virtuous.
-
You know, in a way, depending on perspective, you’re right. However the way I see it is-
Instead of actually arguing against my point, you’re using another completely unrelated point to prove it wrong. Meaning that allied wartime forces were not engaging in acts of violence because they couldn’t solve their disputes. They were doing their job.
One could argue that the military commanders were guilty of this- and I’d see the logic in that argument, but…
In my opinion, ALL things can be resolved without violence. Only, the problem with that is, people generally don’t like the option to solve things peacefully because it usually requires either compromise or hard work. And since we’re an all-or-nothing society now, peaceful compromise is just too much effort.
So yeah. Maybe your right that it’s not what whataboutism, but it’s definitely a false eloquence-
A false equivalence fallacy involves treating multiple situations or viewpoints as equivalent despite their significant differences. This sometimes results from faulty reasoning, but it is often used deliberately to lead an audience to a desired conclusion.
…which in my perspective, is far worse. Because in your example, you’re insulting the men and women who served to protect us by using them to illustrate the idea that they’re incapable of solving their issues without violence.
I hope you’re able to take this information and accept it. Good luck. Violence is animalistic.
-
You were arguing with a different person, I just don't like it when pseudo intellectuals try to deflect valid criticism by incorrectly citing logical fallacies.
Don't care enough to argue with you about the rights and wrongs of violence. But I do care enough to point out that it's also not a false equivalence.
You are very clearly stating that violence ALWAYS wrong. That's what you said, I think verbatim?
They are giving you a scenario where they think violence was not wrong.
You are better off not talking about logical fallacies, it's making you seem dumber than I am sure you actually are.
-
And you’re better off not accusing others of pseudo intellectualism with a comment history that reads like a cautionary tale on how not to be aggressively obnoxious.
How do you like them apples?
-
I mean, you've misused two logical fallacies.
I'm not claiming to be an intellectual, I am also a pseudo intellectual.
I like being snide. I like being obnoxious. It's fun to take people down a peg when they think they're smarter than they are.
"How do you like them apples?" 😭
Grow up. You lost the factual argument, and you're embarassing yourself by perpetuating an emotional argument with a stranger on the internet. Me? I don't care how losers see me.
Sometimes, I will double down when I'm wrong, even if I know I'm wrong. It's pretty fucking pathetic to be honest.
See, I like being an asshole, and I hate myself for it. There's nothing you can say that will affect me beyond provoking me into a tirade.
And now, I've already won, but I like having the last laugh. Any time you respond to me from now on, I'm just going to respond "lol". Your best bet is to realize that we both suck, and if you want to improve, you should simply block me/ignore me and self-reflect.
Have some self-respect. I don't, and look at where I am.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
BULLSHIT
-
Profound! As was the last time you said the exact same thing.
-
-
237 comments